• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Psychopaths: New Research & Studies

Oi! Get off my furniture! :p
 
Yawning less than your family and friends could be a sign of good sleeping habits, or as suggested by a recent study, it might be a sign of underlying psychopathic tendencies. Either way, though, it’s probably nothing you need to worry too much about.

Individuals are more likely to yawn when they see others around them doing the same. Referred to as the yawn contagion, this idea is built on the idea that yawning is a social phenomenon largely influenced by empathy and our ability to perceive the emotions of others.

Working off this idea, a team of researchers from Baylor University in Texas hypothesized that those with less empathy would be less likely to “catch” the contagious yawn. Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by antisocial behavior and diminished empathy and remorse. If the researchers’ theory proved true, those who scored higher on psychopathic personality tests would also be less likely to react to the contagious yawn.

To test this theory, the team had 135 male and female students complete the Psychopathic Personality Inventory Revised (PPI-R) tests to measure their level of psychopathy. This test asked questions to help determine students’ personalities in relation to traits, such as fearless dominance and self-centered impulsivity. The team then exposed the same students to a yawning paradigm intended to induce a reactionary yawn. Male students were also exposed to a startle-reaction paradigm. ...

http://www.psypost.org/2015/08/psyc...-of-contagious-yawning-researchers-find-36794
 
It seems to me that there is a certain amount of circular argumentation going on here. Statements such as the following: "In a study he repeated in different prison populations, for instance, Newman examined how quickly psychopathic and non-psychopathic individuals respond to a series of mislabeled images" suggest that Newman has already decided who the psychopaths are before testing them. At best his tests illustrate some quirk of psychopathic behaviour, but are certainly not diagnostic of it.

Quite apart from that, the example concerning the mislabelled images suggests to me that psychopaths are probably useful in some circumstances because they are not distracted by trivial detail and can quickly recognise a thing for what it is. That should not only make them less susceptible to sudden attacks by camouflaged creatures but also to marketing and political propaganda.
 
See - wedo have a nice side.

Psychopaths exhibit callous disregard for the welfare of others, suggesting an inability to understand the perspective of people around them. Yet they can also be extremely charming and manipulative, seemingly indicating an awareness of the thoughts of others. This paradox has perplexed researchers, clinicians, legal authorities, and the lay public.

A new Yale study shows that psychopaths lack the ability to automatically assess thoughts of those around them, a process that underlies the formation of human social bonds. However, if asked to deliberately assess thoughts of those around them, they can process the thoughts of others.

"Psychopaths can be extremely manipulative, which requires understanding of another's thoughts," said Yale's Arielle Baskin-Sommers, professor of psychology and senior author of the study published March 12 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "But if they understand the thought of others, why do they inflict so much harm?"

Baskin-Sommers received permission from the Connecticut Department of Correction to study inmates in maximum security prisons. Along with colleagues Lindsey Drayton and Laurie Santos, she had inmates play a computer game in which they were asked to perform a task from either their own perspective or that of an avatar on the screen dressed as an inmate.

Most people find it difficult to ignore the perspective of the avatar entirely, even if they are charged with playing the computer game from their own viewpoint, Baskin-Sommers said. "It is like speaking in front of a class: Your attention should not be on the audience, but it is impossible to ignore social cues such as eye rolling or yawning," she said. "That reflects our automatic process of considering the thoughts of those around us."

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-03-psychopaths-disregard-automatic.html
 
The female sociopath in literature.

“America loves a successful sociopath,” wrote Gary Indiana in Three Month Fever.

And why wouldn’t we? They make such great protagonists. The actual, clinical definition of sociopathy is complex and hotly debated, but its cultural definition is satisfyingly simple: a human monster, one incapable of guilt or empathy. Fictional sociopaths let us see the darkest parts of ourselves writ large. They make outrageous choices, which in turn drive outrageous plots.

According to Dr. Robert C. Hare, who invented the Psychopathy Checklist, the ratio of male to female psychopaths is seven to one. Perhaps consequentially, the female sociopath rarely appears in literature. When she does, she’s a refreshing, even radical presence, because she differs so profoundly from the heroines we’re used to reading. Unchecked by guilt or pity, she can reach unapologetically for what she wants, act on utter self-interest. At times, in her ruthlessness, she can seem like a radiant fantasy of feminist rage unleashed. She might not be someone you’d want as your best friend. She might not even be someone you’d want in the same room. But she’s a dynamic and fascinating character you’re unlikely to forget in a hurry.

https://crimereads.com/literary-visions-of-the-female-sociopath/
 
An interesting study of a psychopath.

The Nest: Trader Rory (Jude Law) persuades his horse trainer wife Allison (Carrie Coon) to move to Britain where he was raised and earned glory in commodities deals. They move along with their children, into a large stately home. Soon problems arise, Alison discovers that Rory has been economical with the truth regarding the move. Bills build up, cheques bounce. The children are unhappy with school, the house appears to have a strange effect on the family; Alison's horse becomes ill. Alison isn't totally blind to Rory's machinations though. The dark foreboding manor is a major player in the unfolding of the narrative, dark corridors, twisted staircases, hidden rooms and doors, a bit like Rory's thought processes. The lies and delusions build to a crescendo as Rory hurtles along a path to self-destruction. Written/Directed by Seán Durkin. 8/10.
 
Last edited:
ramonmercado said:
An interesting study of a psychopath.

The Nest: Trader Rory (Jude Law) persuades his horse trainer wife Allison (Carrie Coon) to move to Britain where he was raised and earned glory in commodities deals. They move along with their children, into a large stately home. Soon problems arise, Alison discovers that Rory has been economical with the truth regarding the move. Bills build up, cheques bounce. The children are unhappy with school, the house appears to have a strange effect on the family; Alison's horse becomes ill. Alison isn't totally blind to Rory's machinations though. The dark foreboding manor is a major player in the unfolding of the narrative, dark corridors, twisted staircases, hidden rooms and doors, a bit like Rory's thought processes. The lies and delusions build to a crescendo as Rory hurtles along a path to self-destruction. Written/Directed by Seán Durkin. 8/10.
Click to expand...
I'm looking forward to seeing this!
 
Last edited:
€ulen$piegel said:
... the example concerning the mislabelled images suggests to me that psychopaths are probably useful in some circumstances because they are not distracted by trivial detail and can quickly recognise a thing for what it is. That should not only make them less susceptible to sudden attacks by camouflaged creatures but also to marketing and political propaganda.
Click to expand...

This theme of psychopathy being "differently advantageous" rather than "clearly pathological" is reflected in a newly published study claiming psychopathy doesn't meet the criteria for being considered a mental illness. On the other hand (no pun intended), the study seems to base its rationale in part on anachronistic attributions of connections between personality and handedness.
Wild Paper Claims Psychopathy May Not Be a Mental Disorder, But Something Else

For more than half a century, the kinds of antisocial personality traits we think of as psychopathic – such as a lack of remorse, aggression, and disregard for the wellbeing of others – have been associated with mental illness.

The line between broken and useful traits can be hazy in biology, leaving open the possibility that what is now considered a malfunction might once have been promoted by natural selection.

We might find it tricky to think of evolution benefiting antisocial people, but nature has no problem leaving room for the occasional freeloader within otherwise cooperative species like our own. Those alternative traits that make psychopaths so despised could feasibly give them an edge in a world where competition for resources is intense.

A team of Canadian researchers explored this possibility in a study published last year in the journal Evolutionary Psychology, arguing psychopathy lacks certain hallmarks of a disorder, so should be considered more like a function operating as intended.

Their conclusion is based on an analysis of existing research containing validated measures of psychopathy together with details on the person's handedness; however, this correlation echoes outdated science from the early days of criminal psychology. ...

Psychopathy can at once be unwanted under one set of circumstances and prized in another, without invoking models of disease. It can be both an alternative strategy to survival, helping in some social contexts before becoming a disorder in another. ...

Whether we'll continue to regard psychopathy as a disorder in the future will depend on a variety of considerations, not least the results of studies like this one. ...
Click to expand...
FULL STORY: https://www.sciencealert.com/wild-n...ot-be-the-mental-disorder-we-imagine-it-to-be
 
Here are the bibliographic details and abstract for the published research report. The full report is accessible at the link below.

Pullman, Lesleigh E., Nabhan Refaie, Martin L. Lalumière, and DB Krupp.
“Is Psychopathy a Mental Disorder or an Adaptation? Evidence From a Meta-Analysis of the Association Between Psychopathy and Handedness.”
Evolutionary Psychology, (October 2021).
https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049211040447.

Abstract
Psychopathy has historically been conceptualized as a mental disorder, but there is growing evidence that it may instead be an alternative, adaptive life history strategy designed by natural selection. Although the etiology of mental disorders is not fully understood, one likely contributor is perturbations affecting neurodevelopment. Nonright-handedness is a sign of such perturbations, and therefore can be used to test these competing models. If psychopathy is a mental disorder, psychopaths should show elevated rates of nonright-handedness. However, an adaptive strategy perspective expects psychopaths to be neurologically healthy and therefore predicts typical rates of nonright-handedness. We meta-analyzed 16 studies that investigated the association between psychopathy and handedness in various populations. There was no difference in the rates of nonright-handedness between community participants high and low in psychopathy. Furthermore, there was no difference between psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders in rates of nonright-handedness, though there was a tendency for offenders scoring higher on the Interpersonal/Affective dimension of psychopathy to have lower rates of nonright-handedness, and for offenders scoring higher on the Behavioral dimension of psychopathy to have higher rates of nonright-handedness. Lastly, there was no difference in rates of nonright-handedness between psychopathic and nonpsychopathic mental health patients. Thus, our results fail to support the mental disorder model and partly support the adaptive strategy model. We discuss limitations of the meta-analysis and implications for theories of the origins of psychopathy.

SOURCE / FULL REPORT: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14747049211040447
 
Whoa.
Premises:
1. Psychopathy may be defined as a "perturbation(s) affecting neurodevelopment".
2. Nonright-handedness is a sign of such perturbations
Ergo:
3. If psychopathy is a mental disorder, psychopaths should show elevated rates of nonright-handedness

Oh yeah?
This is only true if
Nonright-handedness is always a sign of such perturbations. Or "in more than 50% of cases of non-righthandedness" (and they do mean left-handedness right? Because if there's another option they should be posting on this Board.)

These are, like, degreed professionals?
 
Lb8535 said:
Whoa.
Premises:
1. Psychopathy may be defined as a "perturbation(s) affecting neurodevelopment".
2. Nonright-handedness is a sign of such perturbations
Ergo:
3. If psychopathy is a mental disorder, psychopaths should show elevated rates of nonright-handedness

Oh yeah?
This is only true if
Nonright-handedness is always a sign of such perturbations. Or "in more than 50% of cases of non-righthandedness" (and they do mean left-handedness right? Because if there's another option they should be posting on this Board.)

These are, like, degreed professionals?
Click to expand...

@Lb8535: great minds think alike :) I had already composed this post when I refreshed and read yours. I am ambidextrous, BTW, but usually write with my left hand. Perhaps I am a psychopath because of my left-handedness, and an effective one because of my ambidexterity.

But these scientists are published in a peer-reviewed journal. Snark. Snark.
https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...t-make-you-go-wtf.26340/page-757#post-2163937

I have not read the article, and this is not my field, but a few problems with the premises or assumption set leap to the eye:
1. Left-handedness is a brain neurodevelopment perturbation.
2. Left-handedness as a purturbation is or may be significantly associated with other symptoms of the same purturbation.

For premise #1: not all left handedness is correlated with specific, demonstrated brain perturbation.
For premise #2: the overall brain neurodevelopment perturbation must be demonstrated by primary evidence such as brain scan showing different, not healthy activation, or different neurochemicals, and NOT deduced by secondary behavior. Behavior is a symptom (but of what?), not a cause. The cause is a supposition in this case.

So, the entire logic of this seems to be a chain of suppositions. Each of these suppositions may be provisionally acceptable, but strung together, they become more unlikely to hold together.
 
Lb8535 said:
Whoa. ...
These are, like, degreed professionals?
Click to expand...

Yep - it seems at face value to be a pretty bizarre line of reasoning they're using. I haven't had the time to try and figure out how they're connecting the dots.
 
Endlessly Amazed said:
@Lb8535: great minds think alike :) I had already composed this post when I refreshed and read yours. I am ambidextrous, BTW, but usually write with my left hand. Perhaps I am a psychopath because of my left-handedness, and an effective one because of my ambidexterity.

But these scientists are published in a peer-reviewed journal. Snark. Snark.
https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...t-make-you-go-wtf.26340/page-757#post-2163937

I have not read the article, and this is not my field, but a few problems with the premises or assumption set leap to the eye:
1. Left-handedness is a brain neurodevelopment perturbation.
2. Left-handedness as a purturbation is or may be significantly associated with other symptoms of the same purturbation.

For premise #1: not all left handedness is correlated with specific, demonstrated brain perturbation.
For premise #2: the overall brain neurodevelopment perturbation must be demonstrated by primary evidence such as brain scan showing different, not healthy activation, or different neurochemicals, and NOT deduced by secondary behavior. Behavior is a symptom (but of what?), not a cause. The cause is a supposition in this case.

So, the entire logic of this seems to be a chain of suppositions. Each of these suppositions may be provisionally acceptable, but strung together, they become more unlikely to hold together.
Click to expand...
Folks who needed a sexy topic to get published. Yes I'm being too snarky I'm sure they meant well. Maybe it's communication skills.
 
Newly published research tentatively identified a "dark empath" category of individuals associated with elements of diagnosed psychopathology. Dark empaths are capable of exhibiting (at least apparent ... ) empathy, perhaps as an advantageous strategy for fostering opportunities to exert their otherwise negative influences.
'Dark Empaths' Could Hide Some of The Most Dangerous Personality Traits

People with "dark personality traits", such as psychopathy or narcissism, are more likely to be callous, disagreeable and antagonistic in their nature. Such traits exists on a continuum – we all have more or less of them, and this does not necessarily equate to being clinically diagnosed with a personality disorder.

Traditionally, people who are high in dark traits are considered to have empathy deficits, potentially making them more dangerous and aggressive than the rest of us. But we recently discovered something that challenges this idea.

Our study, published in Personality and Individual Differences, identified a group of individuals with dark traits who report above average empathic capacities – we call them "dark empaths".

Since this study, the dark empath has earned a reputation as the most dangerous personality profile. But is this really the case? ...

[The] ... lack of (specifically affective) empathy is a well documented hallmark in clinical psychopathy used to explain their often persistent, instrumental violent behavior. Our own work supports the notion that one of the reasons people with dark traits hurt other people or have difficulties in relationships is an underpinning lack of empathy.

Paradoxically, however, some researchers have previously reported average or even higher levels of some aspects of empathy in some people with dark traits.

This makes sense in a way, as to manipulate others for your own gain – or indeed enjoy the pain of others – you must have at least some capacity to understand them. Thus, we questioned whether dark traits and empathy were indeed mutually exclusive phenomena. ...

As expected, we found a traditional dark triad group with low scores in empathy (about 13 percent of the sample). We also found a group with lower to average levels across all traits (about 34 percent were "typicals") and a group with low dark traits and high levels of empathy (about 33 percent were "empaths").

However, a fourth group of people, the "dark empaths", was clearly evident. They had higher scores on both dark traits and empathy (about 20 percent of our sample). Interestingly, this latter group scored higher on both cognitive and affective empathy than the "dark triad" and "typical" groups. ...
Click to expand...
FULL STORY: https://www.sciencealert.com/dark-e...e-of-the-most-dangerous-of-personality-traits
 
Here are the bibliographic details and abstract from the published research report.

Nadja Heym, Fraenze Kibowski, Claire A.J. Bloxsom, Alyson Blanchard, Alexandra Harper, Louise Wallace, Jennifer Firth, Alexander Sumich
The Dark Empath: Characterising dark traits in the presence of empathy,
Personality and Individual Differences
Volume 169, 2021, 110172, ISSN 0191-8869.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110172.

Abstract
A novel psychological construct characterised by high empathy and dark traits: the Dark Empath (DE) is identified and described relative to personality, aggression, dark triad (DT) facets and wellbeing. Participants (n = 991) were assessed for narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, cognitive empathy and affective empathy. Sub-cohorts also completed measures of (i) personality (BIG5), indirect interpersonal aggression (n = 301); (ii) DT facets of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism, primary and secondary psychopathy and Machiavellianism (n = 285); and (iii) wellbeing (depression, anxiety, stress, anhedonia, self-compassion; n = 240). Latent profile analysis identified a four-class solution comprising the traditional DT (n = 128; high DT, low empathy), DE (n = 175; high DT, high empathy), Empaths (n = 357; low DT, high empathy) and Typicals (n = 331; low DT, average empathy). DT and DE were higher in aggression and DT facets, and lower in agreeableness than Typicals and Empaths. DE had higher extraversion and agreeableness, and lower aggression than DT. DE and DT did not differ in grandiose and vulnerable DT facets, but DT showed lower wellbeing. The DE is less aggressive and shows better wellbeing than DT, but partially maintains an antagonistic core, despite having high extraversion. The presence of empathy did not increase risk of vulnerability in the DE.

SOURCE: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886920303615
 
Evolutionary benefits of being a psychopath.

When you start to notice them, psychopaths seem to be everywhere. This is especially true of people in powerful places.

By one estimate, as many as 20 percent of business leaders have "clinically relevant levels" of psychopathic tendencies – despite the fact as little as 1 percent of the general population are considered psychopaths. Psychopaths are characterized by shallow emotions, a lack of empathy, immorality, anti-social behavior and, importantly, deceptiveness.


From an evolutionary point of view, psychopathy is puzzling. Given that psychopathic traits are so negative, why do they remain in successive generations?

Psychopathy seems to be, in the words of biologists, "maladaptive", or disadvantageous. Assuming there's a genetic component to this family of disorders, we'd expect it to decrease over time.

But that's not what we see – and there's evidence that the tendencies are, at least in some contexts, an evolutionary benefit. According to my own research, the reason for this may be down to the ability to fake desirable qualities through deception. ...

https://www.sciencealert.com/psychopaths-appear-to-possess-a-mysterious-evolutionary-benefit
 
ramonmercado said:
Evolutionary benefits of being a psychopath.

When you start to notice them, psychopaths seem to be everywhere. This is especially true of people in powerful places.

By one estimate, as many as 20 percent of business leaders have "clinically relevant levels" of psychopathic tendencies – despite the fact as little as 1 percent of the general population are considered psychopaths. Psychopaths are characterized by shallow emotions, a lack of empathy, immorality, anti-social behavior and, importantly, deceptiveness.


From an evolutionary point of view, psychopathy is puzzling. Given that psychopathic traits are so negative, why do they remain in successive generations?

Psychopathy seems to be, in the words of biologists, "maladaptive", or disadvantageous. Assuming there's a genetic component to this family of disorders, we'd expect it to decrease over time.

But that's not what we see – and there's evidence that the tendencies are, at least in some contexts, an evolutionary benefit. According to my own research, the reason for this may be down to the ability to fake desirable qualities through deception. ...

https://www.sciencealert.com/psychopaths-appear-to-possess-a-mysterious-evolutionary-benefit
Click to expand...
As one of my brothers is a sociopath / psychopath (I have trouble distinguishing the differences, and perhaps he is both anyway), I believe that their biggest talent is charm - they develop a false front when very young, and can charm anyone into believing absolutely anything about them.
It must be a strain to keep this 'false face' on all the time, and every once in a while I would see it slip away on my brother. Smiling, happy, always the 'life of the party', underneath it all he was busy stealing / scamming / plotting who he was going to hit up next. And no one could believe that this charmer was the one who robbed them blind - until it was too late.
When he would be approached and accused of his actions, he went into a rage of indignation, and always had an innocent 'victim' he would blame with his crimes. Then he was on to his next robbery, he could not care less how devastated his victims were, or that he left them broke.
There will always be sociopaths / psychopaths, because it is their survival technique, the only way they know how to live in this world, off other people.
And certainly those in high places use us in exactly the same way.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
Excuse me if anyone else has mentioned this, but I watched 'The Talented Mr. Ripley' the other day, Matt Damon as Ripley, from 1999. First time I've seen it, from the book by Patricia Highsmith. Very interesting how Damon morphs into whatever the situation requires.
Eye opening.
Click to expand...
Yes. This is one of the few movies I have watched. Well played.

I think that to have a very nasty family member is a great opportunity to closely observe over a long time what one does not wish to be (assuming that one doesn't wish to emulate). People who do not have these opportunities seem to me to be oblivious to the dangers.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
Excuse me if anyone else has mentioned this, but I watched 'The Talented Mr. Ripley' the other day, Matt Damon as Ripley, from 1999. First time I've seen it, from the book by Patricia Highsmith. Very interesting how Damon morphs into whatever the situation requires.
Eye opening.
Click to expand...

Great film and book. Also worth watching is Ripley's Game, set about 20 years after Talented, with John Malkovich as Ripley.
 
ramonmercado said:
Psychopathy seems to be, in the words of biologists, "maladaptive", or disadvantageous. Assuming there's a genetic component to this family of disorders, we'd expect it to decrease over time.

But that's not what we see – and there's evidence that the tendencies are, at least in some contexts, an evolutionary benefit.
Click to expand...

Culling the herd...

Actually, the traits are desireable if they can be applied to The Enemy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top